Get Culverhouse, Karsa & Holt in now

[Newton 0]

These 3 are all available now, and are winners

We need winners every one connected with the squad is used to and grown to accept losing as a way of life

These 3 have the winning mentality we need

At least give Neil a chance next season with some experience around him

Thank goodness the Board have at last seen sense and rejected Neil''s idea to bring back someone who was sacked 10 years ago as 1st team coach and currently coaches Needham Market & Ip - shit U12''s

[lappinitup 629]

[TIL 1010 5,246]

Nobody knew what Karsa did when he was here so maybe you could enlighten us as to what he would bring to the party this time around.

[Gingerpele 0]

You don''t know what Karsa did?

He was basically what the Technical Director or whatever they are calling it will be.

And I expect should Lambert stay at Villa into next season they will struggle even more unless they manage to bring in a coupe of very good replacements.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I would feel a lot better about Adams if we could get Culverhouse in with him - somebody who has been here with us in this league before. From what I remember, didn''t he deal with the players on a day to day basis in training?

As for Karsa, didn''t he deal with things similar to what McNally mentioned the TD would deal with? If so they could be the base we need for Adams to be a success.

As for Holt, I doubt he would come back. But he could be valuable asset. Normally I would be against any move like this, but we never replaced Holt in terms of player and leader - that in turn was possibly one of the biggest causes of relegation

[Buh 0]

Gary karsa was Paul lamberts b*tch

He made the tea

Holt hates McNally because he wouldn''t give him the payrise he wanted

Culverhouse did a lot of good but is suspect he burned his bridges.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

I don''t think Culverhouse/Adams would work.

Adams has already said his favourite aspect of management is coaching and, from what we''ve been told, he personally leads the sessions himself as well as being involved in their organisation.

Culverhouse is also a ''coach-first'' kind of guy, who under Lambert was allowed to personally lead the sessions that they came up with while Lambert took more of a back seat role.

I don''t think they''d complement each other as a team that well.

[YellowNets1901 0]

Holt - no. We had his best days.

Culverhouse & Karsa - depends what they did at Villa to get the sack.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I don''t think Culverhouse/Adams would work.

Adams has already said his favourite aspect of management is coaching and, from what we''ve been told, he personally leads the sessions himself as well as being involved in their organisation.

Culverhouse is also a ''coach-first'' kind of guy, who under Lambert was allowed to personally lead the sessions that they came up with while Lambert took more of a back seat role.

I don''t think they''d complement each other as a team that well.

[/quote]

If this is the case I think Adams will struggle - there''s a reason top teams have top managers and top coaches. He may need to step back from the coaching in order to be a top manager

[Wiz 0]

I really believe these bridges are truely burned.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="Rogue Baboon"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I don''t think Culverhouse/Adams would work.

Adams has already said his favourite aspect of management is coaching and, from what we''ve been told, he personally leads the sessions himself as well as being involved in their organisation.

Culverhouse is also a ''coach-first'' kind of guy, who under Lambert was allowed to personally lead the sessions that they came up with while Lambert took more of a back seat role.

I don''t think they''d complement each other as a team that well.

[/quote]

If this is the case I think Adams will struggle - there''s a reason top teams have top managers and top coaches. He may need to step back from the coaching in order to be a top manager[/quote]

Not on the continent they don''t. In Europe, the best coaches tend to be the best managers. This is because their footballing structure is based around the idea of giving the ''head coach'' as much time as possible to focus on helping the team prepare for their games and delegating other managerial concerns (sports science, scouting, footballing recruitment etc.) to their DoF. Whilst Norwich won''t have a named DoF, the fact the board have mentioned both a director of footballing recruitment and technical director means that, in practice, Norwich will essentially have a DoF. I don''t think it''s a coincidence that at a time when the Norwich board have admitted the necessity for managerial restructuring that Norwich have hired one of the better coaches they''ve been linked to, rather than the ''managers'' of Mackay and Lennon. 

[drurys testamonials V 15 0]

[quote user="YellowNets1901"]Holt - no. We had his best days. Culverhouse & Karsa - depends what they did at Villa to get the sack.[/quote]

 

Agreed

[Newton 0]

Yellow nets what a joke

Wolf better than Holt

NO WAY HA HA HA

[Newton 0]

On what basis is wolf better than Holt ?

Wolf has no pace, physical presence, unable to hold the ball up etc etc etc

U need all these attributes to be successful as a striker in English football. Other than a good eye for a shot , what attributes does he have to be a success ?

Can one of his supporters please explain ?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

No you don''t at all.

Aguero? Suarez? Van Persie? Torres in his prime? Owen? Henry?

You need those attributes if you want to use him as somebody to hold the ball up and bully defenders. Players like RVW need the ball to feet in the box. To compare RVW to Holt is like comparing Ozil to Patrick Viera. Same position, completely different type of player.

[Newton 0]

Who on earth was brought in to replace Holt then ?

RVW & Hooper both need someone to hold up the ball ?

Who was that ?

If RVW is only effective for open goal tap ins , why did we pay £8M

Plastic fans amaze me

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Elmander. Failure to properly replace Holt led to lack of leadership and lack of presence up front. The fact that Hooper and RVW couldn''t do the same role as Holt is not there fault - they are completely different types of player. We could have replaced Holt with Suarez, Messi, Aguero and they could not have done the same job as Holt - that''s not the players fault, it was Hughtons fault for thinking they would

[Newton 0]

I agree but we cannot have 2 x players at a cost of £15M who cannot play on there own

One will have to go ?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Maybe - probably RVW, although Hooper will probably want to go as well. A better signing than either would have been Rickie Lambert who was rumoured to be available at the time, given how Hughton wanted to play.

We effectively brought 2 strikers to play the same role, yet neither were suited to that role. Hence why we had strikers that started 2 or 3 games before getting dropped again

[littleyellowbirdie 3,140]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="Rogue Baboon"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I don''t think Culverhouse/Adams would work.

Adams has already said his favourite aspect of management is coaching and, from what we''ve been told, he personally leads the sessions himself as well as being involved in their organisation.

Culverhouse is also a ''coach-first'' kind of guy, who under Lambert was allowed to personally lead the sessions that they came up with while Lambert took more of a back seat role.

I don''t think they''d complement each other as a team that well.

[/quote]

If this is the case I think Adams will struggle - there''s a reason top teams have top managers and top coaches. He may need to step back from the coaching in order to be a top manager[/quote]

Not on the continent they don''t. In Europe, the best coaches tend to be the best managers. This is because their footballing structure is based around the idea of giving the ''head coach'' as much time as possible to focus on helping the team prepare for their games and delegating other managerial concerns (sports science, scouting, footballing recruitment etc.) to their DoF. Whilst Norwich won''t have a named DoF, the fact the board have mentioned both a director of footballing recruitment and technical director means that, in practice, Norwich will essentially have a DoF. I don''t think it''s a coincidence that at a time when the Norwich board have admitted the necessity for managerial restructuring that Norwich have hired one of the better coaches they''ve been linked to, rather than the ''managers'' of Mackay and Lennon. 

[/quote]I think this may be one of the most lucid posts I''ve ever read on here.

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I don''t think Culverhouse/Adams would work.

Adams has already said his favourite aspect of management is coaching and, from what we''ve been told, he personally leads the sessions himself as well as being involved in their organisation.

Culverhouse is also a ''coach-first'' kind of guy, who under Lambert was allowed to personally lead the sessions that they came up with while Lambert took more of a back seat role.

I don''t think they''d complement each other as a team that well.

[/quote]

Yep I agree.  It''s clear Adams wants to be a hands on manager,  so anybody coming in on the training field will be assistants as it were.  Unless something can be worked out. I very much doubt Culverhouse will be back even though he fits in with the ''Norwich Way'' philosophy.

[littleyellowbirdie 3,140]

As I understand it Culverhouse and Karsa are on the market and on the face of it we know they''ve done a good job here in the past. On the other hand, I think the club should make sure they understand fully what actually happened to get them suspended and sacked at Villa and be happy that it''s something that they can reasonable ignore.

[Newton 0]

We need winners that is what these 3 are

[Salopian 1]

Culverhouse, yes, so long as his reason for sacking is not heinous.

Karsa - what did he contribute that we should want him back?

Holt - against him is that he is getting past it, hasn''t done terribly well since leaving us, and some think that he tried to milk the club.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

On balance , I''d not be for this idea, if for no other reason that going back tends not to work.But I have a horrible feeling that if these three end up at a Championship club next season, then they will take 6 points off Norwich........

[Newton 0]

Salopian wrote the following post at 25/05/2014 2:56 PM:

Culverhouse, yes, so long as his reason for sacking is not heinous.

Karsa - what did he contribute that we should want him back?

Holt - against him is that he is getting past it, hasn''t done terribly well since leaving us, and some think that he tried to milk the club.

These 3 were instrumental in getting us from L1 to the Prem, they are winners - how much have we lost (cash) due to wishy washy decisions by the so called board - do we want to get back to the Prem or not ?

If not these 3, let me have your suggestions as Asist Manager, Tech Director and CF back up / Club Captain ?

Cannot see anyone naming any viable alternatives or do we all wait for the boards cheap & cheerful alternatives - & then rave about them ?

[Joanna Grey 0]

Why are NCFC fans responding to Newton the Scummer? If Pete is not going to ban him please ignore him!

[Newton 0]

Joanna Grey wrote the following post at 25/05/2014 7:29 PM:

Why are NCFC fans responding to Newton the Scummer? If Pete is not going to ban him please ignore him!

Another poster on here who adds nothing positive - just gets off on negative comments - what r your views - but then I suspect that u don''t have any